Just had to have a threesome

[exper]

Spot the rep...

[torresp]

According to your signature 116520, isn't it? :p

[frankmb]

All three are reps?

[blue_sphere]

Close up pictures and ill tell you.

little blurry and small

[southcoast68]

Youre good on those photographs, even to the point of making sure the hands on the GMT are set so that it is hard to determine the handstack. The photos are just enough in size and lighting to make it tough, bravo. I going to go out on a limb and say that NONE of them are reps for the following reasons;

GMT II - The lighting is just dim enough to not be able to tell the coloring of the numbers on the bezel (reps have darker siver numbers), but the rehaut engraving does not look "printed" like many of the reps do and the cyclop has the signature AR coating on it and it really stands out to my eye. So based on its overall looks, I say its a gen. If this is a rep, its had the cyclop AR mod done to it and it is very well done.

DAYTONA - The bezel is the giveaway, it shows up much "flatter" and less conicle than what the rep has. I also can just make out the ROLEXROLEXROLEX rehaut engraving, and I do not beleive any Daytona reps feature that yet. The hands also appear to be the correct size (many Daytona reps have hour and minute hands that are too thin). If this is a rep, i NEED to know its source.

MILGAUSS - I'll say gen again based on the dial. The dial, from what I can make out just looks too good. The coronet at 12:00 has the "flatter" bottom and even the most current rep of this has a coronet logo that is a bit too round on the bottom. The Milgauss name on the rep looks a tad bigger than the gen and yours looks about the right size.

Thats my guess, I stared at these for a few minutes and I do not see anything on any of them that would tip them off as reps. In any case, real nice set you have there, wear them well.

Cheers

[youpmelone]

top picture the IIc has the rep bezel (pointy inside of 4)

the bottom has a gen bezel.

so I'd guess top = reps

bottom = gens

good idea...

[exper]

Ding Ding we have a winner Southcoast68 is indeed correct as they are all gens - my proud 3 and to think about 6 months ago I wasn't convinced I would buy gen Rolex's as I felt they had the "is it fake" stigma attached to them

Edited November 25, 2008 by exper

[alligoat]

Congratulations on a nice collection of gen Rollies. Isn't it nice to know that whenever you wear one of those three watches, you are above reproach? Of course, I've never been called out with a rep Rollie except by my daughter who knows I collect reps- kinda like 'no fair'. I guess all my other friends are too proper, or don't know squat about watches!

[southcoast68]

On the top picture, its kinda cool that the AR on the cyclops makes it look like there is a hole in the crystal. Once again, nice collection, thanks for sharing.

Cheers

[Guest Sql_pl]

Great watches you have there!

Wear them well!

[RobbieG]

If for no other reason, one can always just answer "all gens" whenever you see one of these tricky threads. On this one it was easier simply because nobody is going to risk having to give away money to someone who guesses correctly and accidentally...

Really nice watches my friend. I'm not a big Milly fan myself, but I did own the GMT myself and also had a steel Daytona years ago as well and they are both wonderful timepieces. Nice diverse and limited collection. Just what a guy needs!

[youpmelone]

hmm the 4 on the first pic looks really diffrent then the 4 on the second pic.

must be the angle then..

[milsub5517]

spot the rep? wtf?

[exper]

Thanks guys, appreciate the comments. To be honest the milly wasn't my favourite either - when looking at photos but this watch definately much better in person with the green crystal and less old manly